Hi, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Jonathan Nieder wrote: >>> Is this analogous to "git add --ignore-removal"? If so, can we just >>> call it --ignore-removal? >> >> Yes, it seems like they are very similar. > > Hmm, I am not sure if the word "removal" makes sense in the context > of "checkout", as "removal" is an _action_ just like "checking out" > itself is, and not a _state_. You'd check out a state out of a tree > to the index and the working tree, so "checking out absence of a > path" may make sense, though, as "absence of a path" is a state > recorded in that source tree object. I find --ignore-removal fairly easy to understand, and I had no idea what --overlay would mean. I realize this is just one user's experience. I'd be happy to do a little informal survey (e.g. taking the description from the manpage and asking people to name the option) if that's useful. See also https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=32212 on this subject. > The word "removal" makes little sense in "git add --ignore-removal", > but it and "git add --no-all" outlived their usefulness already, so > it may not be worth _fixing_ it. But I am mildly opposed to spread > the earlier mistake to a new option. I think that's a good place to end up: once we flip the default for checkout, then --ignore-removal would be an obscure option in that command as well. The consistency with "git add" is just a bonus. Thanks, Jonathan
